[ad_1]
Supreme Court on Friday (July 21) Issued a notice to the Government of Gujarat On plea from Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is challenging the Gujarat High Court order He refused to stay his conviction in a criminal defamation case.
Justice Javai told the parties that his father had been associated with Congress for a long time and asked them to make a call as to whether or not he should hear the matter.
“There is some difficulty on my part. My father…was associated with Congress for more than 40 years…so against that background you have to take a call whether I should take it or not,” said Justice Javai.
“We have no objection,” said Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, who appeared on behalf of the complainant, Poornesh Modi.
The bench of judges BR Gavai and PK Mishra has set August 4 as the date for the next hearing.
When can judges step down?
In the above case, Justice Javai outlined a potential conflict of interest and asked the parties to decide whether or not they wanted him to hear the matter.
When there is a file Conflict of interest, the judge can withdraw From hearing a case to prevent the perception that it carries bias in making a decision. Conflict of interest can be in many ways – from owning stock in a litigant’s company to having a past or personal association with a party involved in the case.
This practice stems from the basic principle of due process which states that no person can be a judge in her case. Any interest or conflict of interest will be grounds for withdrawing from the case because the judge has a duty to act fairly. Another example of disqualification is when an appeal is made in the High Court against a High Court ruling that may have been made by a High Court judge while she was in the High Court.
What is the step down process?
The decision to disqualify generally comes from the judge himself as it relies on the judge’s conscience and discretion to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. In the aforementioned case, Justice Gavai was frank about his father’s association with the Congress Party. However, since the complainant himself did not object to his handling of the matter, there was no recusal.
In some circumstances, attorneys or parties to a case will file a motion to recuse themselves before the judge. If the judge refuses, the case is brought before the Chief Justice for assignment to a new stand.
What did the previous rulings say in this case?
There are no official rules governing disqualification, although several Supreme Court rulings have dealt with the issue.
In the case of Ranjit Thakur v Union of India (1987), the Supreme Court held that the tests of probability of bias are the reasonableness of apprehension in the mind of the party.
“The correct approach for a judge is not to look into his own mind and ask himself, bluntly, ‘Am I biased? “But to consider the mind of the party before him,” the court had held.
The 1999 Charter “Reformulating Values in Judicial Life” states that “a judge may not hear and decide a matter in a company in which he owns shares…unless he discloses his interest and no objection is raised to the hearing and decision of the matter.” ‘, which is a code of conduct approved by the Supreme Court.
[ad_2]
